Malicious Persons and False Lies

I am presently working on transcribing a letter which King Henry VIII had written and circulated to various towns in late 1538 or early 1539. The letter proclaims Henry's authority over the English church, and then goes into a long screed against the Pope (demoted to Bishop of Rome in the letter). With the Pope demonized and delegitimized, the ordinary Catholics (still a majority in England at that point) become his next target. Henry demands the local authorities be sure to keep watch for, then arrest and punish these "evil doers" and "malicious persons" so to set a "terrible example" to others. The Pope and Catholics are considered "spreaders of rumors" who tell "false lies" and whose "devilish persuasions" "seduce" his subjects. The letter is quite an interesting read. What we have is the king trying to dominate the message by making it clear who the good guys are, who the bad guys are, and what is to be done to them. It is black and white. The enemy is clearly defined, and whatever they say are lies. For the mayors and councilors of these towns, despite the fact that most of them were Catholic in upbringing, it is now very obvious which way the wind was blowing and what they must do in order to avoid bringing down the King's wrath on their heads. It is no coincidence that a few months later the King's representatives arrived in the various towns to complete the dissolution and royal seizure of all monasteries and friaries. There would be minimal resistance. Over the last few years there has been a steady flow of claims alleging that Hilary Clinton is responsible for various deaths, that she betrays secrets, that she rigs elections, that she is corrupt and criminal. It is a steady drumbeat of messages demonizing and delegitimizing her. Her supporters, ordinary Democrats, are a target too. In the same messages they are described as anti-American, entitled takers, criminals, and anti-Christian. Their arguments are labelled as lies designed to destroy America. These memes, and Internet posts, and news reports, and proclamations from politicians make interesting reading. Obviously the same tactic of demonizing ones enemy has been used for centuries. While it has its own problems - demonizing people allows you to rationalize doing horrible things to them - what is of most concern here, like with Henry VIII, is the demonization of ones neighbors, fellow citizens, and countrymen. That is the dangerous and exceptional tactic being used in these two cases. In Henry's case it was a top down process, as power was imbalanced. Concentrated power at the top forced people to avoid opposing him. They changed religious allegiance from political expediency. In the modern US power is a little more diffuse. There is a fairly even balance of power between the major political parties. This means if Clinton and the Democrats win then many of the losing 50% of people will likely believe the country is governed illegitimately by cheats, criminals, and anti-American, anti-Christian traitors. What will their reaction be? I don't see a rolling back of the rhetoric. I do see a lot of angry people with guns who have just received the massive encouragement of witnessing the Malheur Seven getting away with an armed take over of public property. At this point the historian in me is going to take over, I'll keep standing back to observe and analyze.